4.8 Article

Natural history of long-COVID in a nationwide, population cohort study

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-39193-y

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous studies on long-COVID have been limited, and without comparison groups, it is difficult to differentiate disease progression from symptoms caused by other factors. The Long-COVID in Scotland Study (Long-CISS) conducted a cohort study in Scotland, comparing adults with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection to PCR-negative adults. The study found that individuals with previous symptomatic infection had a higher prevalence of symptoms compared to those who were never infected, with altered taste, smell, and confusion improving over time, and late onset dry and productive cough, and hearing problems being more likely following SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Previous studies on the natural history of long-COVID have been few and selective. Without comparison groups, disease progression cannot be differentiated from symptoms originating from other causes. The Long-COVID in Scotland Study (Long-CISS) is a Scotland-wide, general population cohort of adults who had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection matched to PCR-negative adults. Serial, self-completed, online questionnaires collected information on pre-existing health conditions and current health six, 12 and 18 months after index test. Of those with previous symptomatic infection, 35% reported persistent incomplete/no recovery, 12% improvement and 12% deterioration. At six and 12 months, one or more symptom was reported by 71.5% and 70.7% respectively of those previously infected, compared with 53.5% and 56.5% of those never infected. Altered taste, smell and confusion improved over time compared to the never infected group and adjusted for confounders. Conversely, late onset dry and productive cough, and hearing problems were more likely following SARS-CoV-2 infection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据